European Radiology

, Volume 29, Issue 1, pp 287–298 | Cite as

Prostate artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • B. MallingEmail author
  • M. A. Røder
  • K. Brasso
  • J. Forman
  • M. Taudorf
  • L. Lönn



Prostate artery embolisation (PAE) is a new minimally invasive treatment for lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) in men with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). The purpose of this study was to review the efficacy and safety of PAE in the treatment of BPH with LUTS.


A systematic review performed according to the PRISMA guidelines with a pre-specified search strategy for PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library and Embase databases protocol (PROSPERO ID: CRD42017059196). Trials studying the efficacy of prostate artery embolisation to treat LUTS with more than ten participants and follow-up longer than 6 months were included by two independent authors. Outcomes investigated were International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS), quality of life (QoL), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-5), prostate volume (PV), prostate-specific antigen (PSA), peak void flow (Qmax), post-void residual (PVR) and complications. To summarise mean change from baseline, a meta-analysis was done using the random-effects model.


The search returned 210 references, of which 13 studies met the inclusion criteria, representing 1,254 patients. Patients in the included studies with data available for meta-analysis had moderate to severe LUTS and a mean IPSS of 23.5. Statistically significant (p value < 0.05) improvements of all investigated outcomes were seen at 12-month follow-up. Major complications were reported in 0.3% of the cases.


Our findings suggest that PAE can reduce moderate to severe LUTS in men with BPH with a low risk of complications.

Key Points

• Prostate artery embolisation (PAE) improved International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) by 67%.

• Major complications after PAE are very rare.

• Use of cone-beam CT may reduce risk of non-target embolisation.


Male Lower urinary tract symptoms Prostatic hyperplasia Embolisation, therapeutic 



Acute urinary retention


Benign prostatic hyperplasia


International Prostate Symptom Score


International Index of Erectile Function


Lower urinary tract symptoms


Non-target embolisation


Prostate artery embolisation


Post-embolisation syndrome


Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis


Prostate-specific antigen


Prostate volume


Post-void residual


Peak urinary flow


Quality of life


Society of Interventional Radiology


Transurethral resection of the prostate


Urinary tract infection



The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Compliance with ethical standards


The scientific guarantor of this publication is Professor Lars Lönn.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare relationships with the following companies: Lars Lönn, Medical Director, Mentice.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was not required for this study because this was a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was not required because this was a systematic review and meta-analysis.


• prospective

• systematic review and meta-analysis


  1. 1.
    Roehrborn CG (2005) Benign prostatic hyperplasia: an overview. Rev Urol 7:S3–S14PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thorpe A, Neal D (2003) Benign prostatic hyperplasia. Lancet 361:1359–1367. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Girman CJ, Epstein RS, Jacobsen SJ et al (1994) Natural history of prostatism: impact of urinary symptoms on quality of life in 2115 randomly selected community men. Urology 44:825–831CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Oelke M, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A et al (2013) EAU guidelines on the treatment and follow-up of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol 64:118–140. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McVary KT, Roehrborn CG, Avins AL et al (2011) Update on AUA guideline on the management of benign prostatic hyperplasia. J Urol 185:1793–1803. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chua ME, Mendoza J, See M et al (2015) A critical review of recent clinical practice guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms. Can Urol Assoc J 9:E463–E470. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Reich O, Gratzke C, Bachmann A et al (2008) Morbidity, mortality and early outcome of transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective multicenter evaluation of 10,654 patients. J Urol 180:246–249. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rassweiler J, Teber D, Kuntz R, Hofmann R (2006) Complications of transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP)—incidence, management, and prevention. Eur Urol 50:969–979; discussion 980. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Guo R, Yu W, Meng Y et al (2016) Correlation of ASA Grade and the Charlson Comorbidity Index with complications in patients after transurethral resection of prostate. Urology 98:120–125. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Muzzonigro G, Milanese G, Minardi D et al (2004) Safety and efficacy of transurethral resection of prostate glands up to 150 ml: a prospective comparative study with 1 year of follow up. J Urol 172:611–615. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith C, Craig P, Taleb S et al (2017) Comparison of traditional and emerging surgical therapies for lower urinary tract symptoms in men: a review. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40:1176–1184. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    DeMeritt JS, Elmasri FF, Esposito MP, Rosenberg GS (2000) Relief of benign prostatic hyperplasia-related bladder outlet obstruction after transarterial polyvinyl alcohol prostate embolisation. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR 11:767–770CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 339:b2535. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Malling B (2016) Prostatic artery embolisation for benign prostatic hyperplasia: a systematic review. PROSPERO: International prospective register of systematic reviews. Available from:
  15. 15.
    Covidence systematic review software, Veritas Health Innovation, Melbourne, Australia. Available at
  16. 16.
    Higgins JPT, Sterne JAC, Savović J, Page MJ, Hróbjartsson A, Boutron I, Reeves B, Eldridge S (2016) A revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
  17. 17.
    Gratzke C, Bachmann A, Descazeaud A et al (2015) EAU Guidelines on the assessment of non-neurogenic male lower urinary tract symptoms including benign prostatic obstruction. Eur Urol 67:1099–1109. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Angle JF, Siddiqi NH, Wallace MJ et al (2010) Quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous transcatheter embolisation: Society of Interventional Radiology Standards of Practice Committee. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR 21:1479–1486. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Borenstein M (2009) Introduction to meta-analysis, 1st edn. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    R Development Core Team (2008) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. ISBN 3-900051-07-0. URL
  21. 21.
    Lumley T (2012) rmeta: meta-analysis. R package version 2.16.
  22. 22.
    Gao Y, Huang Y, Zhang R et al (2014) Benign prostatic hyperplasia: prostatic arterial embolisation versus transurethral resection of the prostate—a prospective, randomized, and controlled clinical trial. Radiology 270:920–928. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Amouyal G, Thiounn N, Pellerin O et al (2016) Clinical results after prostatic artery embolisation using the PErFecTED technique: a single-center study. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 39:367–375. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bagla S, Smirniotopoulos JB, Orlando JC et al (2015) Comparative analysis of prostate volume as a predictor of outcome in prostate artery embolisation. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR 26:1832–1838. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gonçalves OM, Carnevale FC, Moreira AM et al (2016) Comparative study using 100-300 versus 300-500 μm microspheres for symptomatic patients due to enlarged-BPH prostates. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 39:1372–1378. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Pisco JM, Bilhim T, Pinheiro LC et al (2016) Medium- and long-term outcome of prostate artery embolisation for patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia: results in 630 patients. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR 27:1115–1122. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li Q, Duan F, Wang M-Q et al (2015) Prostatic arterial embolisation with small sized particles for the treatment of lower urinary tract symptoms due to large benign prostatic hyperplasia: preliminary results. Chin Med J (Engl) 128:2072–2077. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rampoldi A, Barbosa F, Secco S et al (2017) Prostatic artery embolisation as an alternative to indwelling bladder catheterization to manage benign prostatic hyperplasia in poor surgical candidates. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40:530–536. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kurbatov D, Russo GI, Lepetukhin A et al (2014) Prostatic artery embolisation for prostate volume greater than 80 cm3: results from a single-center prospective study. Urology 84:400–404. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Wang MQ, Wang Y, Yan JY et al (2016) Prostatic artery embolisation for the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia in men ≥75 years: a prospective single-center study. World J Urol 34:1275–1283. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    de Assis AM, Moreira AM, de Paula Rodrigues VC et al (2015) Prostatic artery embolisation for treatment of benign prostatic hyperplasia in patients with prostates > 90 g: a prospective single-center study. J Vasc Interv Radiol JVIR 26:87–93. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gabr AH, Gabr MF, Elmohamady BN, Ahmed A-F (2016) Prostatic artery embolisation: a promising technique in the treatment of high-risk patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia. Urol Int 97:320–324. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Shaker M, Abd El Tawab KA, Abd El Tawab KH, El-Gharib M (2016) Role of prostatic artery embolisation in management of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med 47:839–845. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Carnevale FC, Iscaife A, Yoshinaga EM et al (2016) Transurethral resection of the prostate (TURP) versus original and PErFecTED prostate artery embolisation (PAE) due to benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH): preliminary results of a single center, prospective, urodynamic-controlled analysis. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 39:44–52. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien P-A (2004) Classification of surgical complications. Ann Surg 240:205–213. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v4.0 NCI, NIH, DHHS (2009) NIH publication no. 09-7473. National Institutes of Health, BethesdaGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bilhim T, Pisco J, Tinto HR et al (2013) Unilateral versus bilateral prostatic arterial embolisation for lower urinary tract symptoms in patients with prostate enlargement. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 36:403–411. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Bilhim T, Pisco JM, Furtado A et al (2011) Prostatic arterial supply: demonstration by multirow detector angio CT and catheter angiography. Eur Radiol 21:1119–1126. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Pisco JM, Tinto HR, Pinheiro LC et al (2013) Embolisation of prostatic arteries as treatment of moderate to severe lower urinary symptoms (LUTS) secondary to benign hyperplasia: results of short- and mid-term follow-up. Eur Radiol 23:2561–2572. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Roos NP, Wennberg JE, Malenka DJ et al (1989) Mortality and reoperation after open and transurethral resection of the prostate for benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 320:1120–1124. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kuang M, Vu A, Athreya S (2017) A systematic review of prostatic artery embolisation in the treatment of symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40:655–663. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ahyai SA, Gilling P, Kaplan SA et al (2010) Meta-analysis of functional outcomes and complications following transurethral procedures for lower urinary tract symptoms resulting from benign prostatic enlargement. Eur Urol 58:384–397. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    McConnell JD, Roehrborn CG, Bautista OM et al (2003) The long-term effect of doxazosin, finasteride, and combination therapy on the clinical progression of benign prostatic hyperplasia. N Engl J Med 349:2387–2398. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Madersbacher S, Marberger M (1999) Is transurethral resection of the prostate still justified? BJU Int 83:227–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Moreira AM, de Assis AM, Carnevale FC et al (2017) A review of adverse events related to prostatic artery embolisation for treatment of bladder outlet obstruction due to BPH. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol 40:1490–1500. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ingraham CR, Johnson GE, Nair AV, Padia SA (2011) Nontarget embolisation complicating transarterial chemoembolisation in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma. Semin Intervent Radiol 28:202–206. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    López-Benítez R, Radeleff BA, Barragán-Campos HM et al (2007) Acute pancreatitis after embolisation of liver tumors: frequency and associated risk factors. Pancreatology 7:53–62. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wang MQ, Duan F, Yuan K et al (2017) Benign prostatic hyperplasia: cone-beam CT in conjunction with DSA for identifying prostatic arterial anatomy. Radiology 282:271–280. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Radiology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • B. Malling
    • 1
    Email author
  • M. A. Røder
    • 2
  • K. Brasso
    • 2
  • J. Forman
    • 3
  • M. Taudorf
    • 1
  • L. Lönn
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Diagnostic RadiologyRigshospitaletCopenhagenDenmark
  2. 2.Department of UrologyRigshospitaletCopenhagenDenmark
  3. 3.Department of Public HealthUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations